Trump Guilty!

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Then why do we have expert witnesses at all, INCLUDING legal experts? There should be no need for them since the judge is the legal expert.

It's hilarious that you listened to some paid right wing liar for 6 minutes and think you outsmarted the judge.

Good stuff.

 

[Billiejeens]

There are multiple reversable errors on appeal.

 

[Lisa558]

----------------------------------------------------

Poster, the courts allow expert witnesses.....on evidence.
Not law.
Who is qualified to be an expert witness is usually, as far as I know, determined in the the pre-trial hearings.

And why would you presume that the expert witness would not have used evidence - which would be the law itself concerning elections.

 

[Lisa558]

Unless Trump brings in 5 SCOTUS justices as his legal expert, all he has is another person with an "opinion", with no legal weight behind it.

And a judge, who is the actual legal expert on the law.

The judge was not impartial, and was in violation of even being the judge due to his Biden donation(s).

 

[Billiejeens]

And why would you presume that the expert witness would not have used evidence - which would be the law itself concerning elections.

Chilli is 12

 

[Billiejeens]

The judge was not impartial, and was in violation of even being the judge due to his Biden donation(s).

That's squishy there.

Much stronger black and white reversable errors.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

There are multiple reversable errors on appeal.

Lie.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The judge was not impartial, and was in violation of even being the judge due to his Biden donation(s).

Lie. That is not grounds for appeal.

 

[beagle9]

SCOTUS will not step in at least not anytime soon. They recess till the first week in October in 3 weeks and there is no way to add more cases now. Besides that, this is a state case and the high court has to allow state courts to review the case first. The law and rules of the court are the same for a presidential candidate as they are for any other felon convicted in state court.

My understanding is the case first goes to a district court in Manhattan which is just a formality but will take months. From there it goes to a state appeals court and then the New York Supreme Court. If there are ground for a federal appeal, it will go to a US Court of Appeals and from there to the Supreme Court. Of course the Supreme Court may refuse to hear the case. The high court only reviews about 6% of cases of this type. The chance of a New York court reviewing the case before the election is nearly zero. This case could be in the courts for years.

What a complete disaster and abuse of our judicial system.

The left has no respect for law, for precedent, for judicial prudence, for sanctity of the law, and for the system in which they've sought to now overthrow because of their hatred of Donald Trump and conservative America.

I bet you right floppin now that no one on the left who isn't totally brainwashed can even explain why they hate Trump so bad, I mean other than those who are afraid that if any conservative (especially a Christian republican), were to get anywhere near the seat of presidential power again, then the left would begin to melt or go totally crazy....

WHY ? Because the conservative would begin to slowly unravel the intricate web of deceptive practices for which has since led to the leftists successes, but at many people's expence over time. Their success only hinges on government having their back because the majority of people reject their intricate practices.

 

[Lisa558]

That's squishy there.

Much stronger black and white reversable errors.

Yeah, it will be near the bottom of the list for the appeal.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

What a complete disaster and abuse of our judicial system.

You managed to babble for several paragraphs without saying what was wrong with the trial or the evidence.

Because you don't have anything. All you know is that your mangod lost. The rest is just reflexive, on your part.

 

[lennypartiv]

You are really counting on it being a political expert and not a legal expert.
I get it.

This was the blue state of NY. The deck was really stacked against Trump.

 

[candycorn]

What are you people doing, sitting there with your computer mouse trigger cocked like a double barrel shotgun ready to shoot as soon as a post hits the posted position ????? Rotflmbo

I couldn't even proof read and edit before you grabbed the dambed thing or is there some kind of way that you all are able to see what's being typed before its posted ?.. hmm

Since it bothers you....it seems to be working. Nice work Toro

 

[candycorn]

Yea when the defense is blocked by the judge from allowing evidence that shows his innocence and blindly allows the prosecution to do whatever the **** they wanted to without so much as a hint of blocking ANYTHING from being submitted to the court, it was a sham trial and everyone knows it. Even DEMOCRATS are saying it was absurd. To somehow try to twist a 9 year old accounting error which is, at best, a misdemeanor which is long run past its statute of limitations into a felony where he's now facing 134 years in prison (limited by NY to 20) is absurd.

Gagged Trump but let Cohen run his mouth all he wanted to, oh yea, THAT SHIT WAS FAIR. Yea, and I've got a bridge to sell you.

awww poor baby.

 

[Toro]

What are you people doing, sitting there with your computer mouse trigger cocked like a double barrel shotgun ready to shoot as soon as a post hits the posted position ????? Rotflmbo

I couldn't even proof read and edit before you grabbed the dambed thing or is there some kind of way that you all are able to see what's being typed before its posted ?.. hmm

 

[Flopper]

The expert witness knew that what Trump was accused of doing was not illegal. So that means he didn’t have to know if Trump did it or not.

Ex: Lisa is accused of making a hamburger for dinner. The prosecutor is trying her for that and trying to prove it to the jury. An expert witness testifies that making hamburger is not illegal. End of case.

As far as the defense stopping the expert witness, that was because the judge refused to grant immunity. It was the judge’s way of blocking the testimony.

You libs are evil. This was a nothing case about a misdemeanor - if THAT - and used by the Dems to stop their #1 political rival for preventing the continued transformation of America. That they even got this far with a sham charge shows just how far into that transformation we have sunk.

Smith the "expert witness" was on the FEC Board but resigned in 2015 prior to Trump's election and prior to investigation of the candidate's reported election contributions, therefore he could not possible testify as to whether or not Trump reported hush money payments to the FEC. The judge allowed him to testify but not as expert witness in regard to Trump's reports to the FEC because he was not privy to that information. The prosecution decided not call him as a witness.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It has been universally stated that this was a sham trial, even by legal experts within your echo chamber.

How is understanding that a threat ?

Trump is a threat to democracy; he attacks the judicial process and rule of law.

To support Trump and vote for Trump, to want to see Trump back in the WH, is to likewise be an enemy of democracy.

 

[Flopper]

awww poor baby.

It was not an accounting error. Trump wrote the checks and recorded the transaction in his check register as a legal expense. The check register and cancel checks were evidence presented at the trial. Furthermore there were transmittal documents he sent to his accountant to record the transactions in the Business GL. There would have been no question that Trump falsified business records. It is well documented. This would be the first decesion the jury had to make and it was decided unanimously that the business records were falsified.

The second decision the jury had to make would be to determined if the falsification of business records were done to coverup or in conjunction with other crimes; the hush money payments and catch and kill scheme which were a violation of New York election laws and the false campaign spending reports, a violation of federal election law. The jury of course were unanimous in this decesion.

 

[Flopper]

The expert witness knew that what Trump was accused of doing was not illegal. So that means he didn’t have to know if Trump did it or not.

Ex: Lisa is accused of making a hamburger for dinner. The prosecutor is trying her for that and trying to prove it to the jury. An expert witness testifies that making hamburger is not illegal. End of case.

As far as the defense stopping the expert witness, that was because the judge refused to grant immunity. It was the judge’s way of blocking the testimony.

You libs are evil. This was a nothing case about a misdemeanor - if THAT - and used by the Dems to stop their #1 political rival for preventing the continued transformation of America. That they even got this far with a sham charge shows just how far into that transformation we have sunk.

The expert witness was an expert on federal election law. How could he know whether Trump reported the hush money payments to the FEC? He was not on the FEC board at that time and was not privy to the Trump's FEC reporting's. This is why the judge would not allow him to testify as expert witness in regard to Trump's FEC reporting. The Defense could have him testify as an expert witness on FEC reporting, just not Trump's reporting. The Defense opted not to call him as a witness.

 

[Flopper]

There are multiple reversable errors on appeal.

There are always errors made. Whether those errors are sufficient magnitude to overturn the case will be deiced in a higher court probably within the next 2 to 5 years.